ArticleJournal of orthopaedics2025
Transphyseal ACL reconstruction resulted in small incidence of tibial physeal bars at 1-year follow-up.
Article in Journal of orthopaedics, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Five-year MRI follow-up of growth-related complications after ACL reconstruction in children and adolescents.Journal of children's orthopaedics · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Transphyseal anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) is associated with a risk of angular limb deformity and limb length discrepancy particularly when there is a significant period of growth remaining.Previous studies on the effects of transphyseal ACLR have used inconsistent methodology to estimate bone age, and therefore subjects may have underestimated the effect on the physis.This study sought to evaluate the incidence of iatrogenic physeal bar formation following ACLR using high-resolution MRI and a validated bone age atlas. Methods: A prospective series of patients undergoing transphyseal ACLR at a single institute, with high resolution 3T MRIs at 12 months, were included. MRI-validated knee bone age atlas was then used to exclude patients with evidence of physiological physeal closure. The remaining skeletally immature MRI scans were appraised by two independent reviewers for the presence of physeal bar formation adjacent to transphyseal ACL tunnels. Results: From 142 patients undergoing transphyseal ACLR with post-operative MRI, 94 patients were found to exhibit evidence of complete closure of either the tibial or femoral physis and were excluded. 48 patients (38 male - mean age 14.1; 10 female - mean age 13.9) meeting inclusion criteria were included. Mean tibial tunnel diameter was 8.2 mm (SD ± 0.81) and mean femoral tunnel diameter was 7.9 mm (SD ± 0.88). There were two cases (4.2 % of total) of physeal bar formation in the proximal tibia in males (aged 14.2 and 14.7 years) with otherwise open physes. No leg length discrepancy was observed for these patients at a 12 months. No cases of femoral physeal bar formation were identified in our cohort. Conclusion: High resolution 3T MRI scan performed 12 months after transphyseal ACL reconstruction demonstrated 4.2 % incidence of tibial physeal bars and no femoral physeal bars. Neither of the cases physeal bar cases exhibited angular deformity or limb length discrepancy. Central physiological closure of the tibial physis was commonly seen in this age group and may be easily confused with physeal bar formation.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.